Question re: DBM choices for Manners T4A

[strongpoint]

I think I've settled on a Manners T4A as the stock for a R700 build (in .308) I've been brewing up for some time.

I'm looking at the factory build options available from Manners, and I see that the stock is available with my choice of (among other things) the Badger M5 DBM triggerguard or the Badger MCS-DBM mini chassis system for an extra $360.

Questions:

1) What real-world advantages would one offer over the other?

2) Is the difference worth $360? I realize that decision is mine to make, but what factors should be taken into consideration?

3) Is having the DBM installed at the factory my best choice to begin with? I know Randall recommends (I believe) PTG's DBM options as offering the best bang for the buck, but then I'm looking at factoring in the cost of the hardware plus inletting, installation and round-trip shipping to a worthwhile smith.

[waveslayer]

they are both made by Badger, if that helps any. one is lighter. are you looking at the mag version, or the bottom metal? if it were me, save the 360 and use it for extra mags or a bipod!

I'd you are serious about it, email sales@mannersstocks.com, I think that's the right email, if not its on their site. but put attention Matt, he's the manager and ask him, he's a straight shooter.

I'm doing a custom build using the DBM 5 myself, no real difference in the systems. other than they ensure a better fitting mag system, with 5 punts of contact, plus it will fit perfectly in their stocks. the DBM 5 stuff may require some sanding to the mag well to fit properly and trigger. also, you get an enhanced lug for 360... for s simple. 308. save the cash

[robertsma]

I have the mini chassis in my 6.5 and it has worked out really well for me so far. It is a relatively new rifle but shoots amazing so far. I went that as an option because it was cheaper than buying DBM and getting it installed and the action bedded. For me it has worked out really well so far. The only downside is that the magazine release takes a little erring used to compared to surgeon bottom metal. After a lot of dry fire practice with it I'm pretty proficient now.

[FourT6and2]

If you want the action bedded to the stock, get the M5. If you don't want to bed the action/stock, and maybe want to make it easier to sell the stock down the road, get the mini chassis.

[ar15barrels]

1) What real-world advantages would one offer over the other?

2) Is the difference worth $360? I realize that decision is mine to make, but what factors should be taken into consideration?

3) Is having the DBM installed at the factory my best choice to begin with? I know Randall recommends (I believe) PTG's DBM options as offering the best bang for the buck, but then I'm looking at factoring in the cost of the hardware plus inletting, installation and round-trip shipping to a worthwhile smith.

1) The M5 setup allows for a real set of pillars and an epoxy bedding job to properly support the receiver in the stock.

2) The Mini chassis is not an advantage or worth the extra money.
The mini chassis does a poor job or supporting the rear tang of a 700 type receiver because there is nothing touching the receiver behind the center line of the rear action screw.
Tightening the rear action screw to 40+ in-lbs will cause the rear of the receiver to bend.

3) Have manners INLET for the M5 bottom metal when you order the stock.
After that, there is no inletting necessary. You just epoxy the set of pillars that come with your DBM into the stock, drop the DBM into the stock, check that the screws don't hit the bolt when torqued into place (shorten screws if necessary) and you are done.

[FourT6and2]

Any benefit to also bedding the DBM? I see that done sometimes. Probably when the inletting is slightly oversized?

[ar15barrels]

Any benefit to also bedding the DBM?

There is no benefit to bedding the DBM.
If inletting was done correctly, there should be no room for bedding.
If there are sloppy gaps, you can fill them in.

[NiteQwill]

I have the mini chassis. If I could do it all over again, I would have done the M5.

However, that doesn't mean I'm not happy with my current setup.

[Hateca]

Any benefit to also bedding the DBM? I see that done sometimes. Probably when the inletting is slightly oversized?

Unless the pillars were ordered molded into the stock I recommend bedding the bottom metel. Just because the inlet is done right and tight does not mean the BM sits correctly on the pillars under torque. Pillared are straight and the bottom metal sits at an angle. This really sucks when bedding a Howa and CDI bottom metal.

[ar15barrels]

I think I've settled on a Manners T4A as the stock for a R700 build

This really sucks when bedding a Howa and CDI bottom metal.

I was going off the fact that he was building a 700 and M5 type DBM are flat bottomed to match up with flat pillars.
I hate those DBM that get the bottom inlet cut at an angle!

[FourT6and2]

I was going off the fact that he was building a 700 and M5 type DBM are flat bottomed to match up with flat pillars.
I hate those DBM that get the bottom inlet cut at an angle!

What DBM are angled?

[ar15barrels]

What DBM are angled?

CDI.

[Hateca]

I was going off the fact that he was building a 700 and M5 type DBM are flat bottomed to match up with flat pillars.
I hate those DBM that get the bottom inlet cut at an angle!

Might not matter with that set up either. With glued in pillars or molded in there can still be issues. drop everything into the stock and torque the action screws one at a time. If that bottom metal moves or tilts bed it.

[strongpoint]

Thanks for all the replies, everyone (and thanks too to the one user who PMed me). Great information here.

[strongpoint]

Looking over the short-action M5 DBM available from PT&G ... Oberndorf style is out, don't like the mag release position. Are there any advantages/disadvantages to flush mount vs. "stealth" (i.e., magwell extending outside the stock)?